|  | |
Previous | Next
 |
Letters to the editor
Mennonite Brethren Herald welcomes your letters on issues relevant to the Mennonite Brethren Church, especially in response to material published in the Herald. Please keep your letters courteous, brief and about one subject only. We will edit letters for length and clarity. We will not publish letters sent anonymously, although we may withhold names from publication at the request of the letter writer and at our discretion. Publication is also subject to space limitations. Because the Letters column is a free forum for discussion, it should be understood that letters represent the position of the letter writer, not necessarily the position of the Herald or the Mennonite Brethren Church. Send letters to:
Letters, MB Herald
3-169 Riverton Ave.
Winnipeg, Man. R2L 2E5
|
or by e-mail to mbherald@mbconf.ca. (Please ensure that your postal address is included in your e-mail correspondence.) |
Looking for family
My name is Helen Shkolyarenko of Orecheev, Zaporizhye, Ukraine. I am trying to find relatives in Germany or Canada. My grandfather was Vladimir (Walter?) Jacob Gossen, born near Tokmak; grandmother, Yevdokiya Ivanovna; father, Anatoly Vladirovimich, born in 1940 in the Popelak Sevash area of Kherson. In 1941, the Gossen family was exiled to Kirov, Solikamsk, Molotov. Later many moved to Germany or elsewhere. If anyone can help me locate my relatives, please write to me, c/o Mennonite Centre, Rosa Luxembourg Ave., Molochansk, Zaporizhskoe Oblast, 71716, Ukraine; or e-mail menncentre@comint.net.
Sent by Allen Hiebert, Mennonite Centre,
Molochansk, Ukraine
Feminism because of being Christian
We assure Diane Holland, (Letters, Aug. 23) that we are feminists because we are Christians, because our Messiah and Saviour treated women as respectfully as He treated men (Matthew 9; Mark 7, 16; Luke 13; John 4, etc.) showing us that women as well as men were made in the image of God. We believe that’s part of what He meant when He said, “Love your neighbour as yourself.”
We have not left our Mennonite churches because we know that within them are people who seek to follow Jesus in valuing women as much as men. We believe the Holy Spirit is alive in our churches, speaking truth into the hearts and minds of Mennonite disciples who are open to receiving it.
Donna Stewart, Vancouver, B.C.
Leanne Heinrichs, Langley, B.C.
Maria McKay, Burnaby, B.C.
Rosemary Bell, New Westminster, B.C.
Evelyn Labun, North Dakota
Edythe Neumann, Abbotsford, B.C.
Wai Young, Victoria, B.C.
Wanda Derksen Bergen, Abbotsford, B.C.
Mary Reimer, Winnipeg, Man.
Katharina Rempel, Abbotsford, B.C.
Pastors paid both ways
My compliments to your Web team. It is not easy to take a printed magazine and transform it into an appealing, navigable website, but the Herald has succeeded. Thanks for the effort and investment you make to have your articles available online.
I was fascinated with the Aug. 2 edition regarding whether pastors should be paid. Both the Yes and No authors present a biblical case, and both are completely valid options. I was surprised that they agree on the fundamental point that pastors should be paid by the church. They simply disagree on the method of payment: Brian Anderson argues that pastors should be on the payroll, while George H. Epp argues for informal private gifts from individuals in the church.
The Bible presents another option: that church leaders do not get paid by the church, earn their living working outside the church and volunteer their services. This is often referred to as “tent-making” after Paul’s example of practising his trade while planting the church in Corinth (Acts 18:3). Why did Paul and Barnabas give up their right to receive support from the church? Paul answers that question in 1 Corinthians 9:13: “We put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.” Evidently, financial issues with respect to paying the church leader can hinder the spread of the gospel. By not accepting money from the church, Paul had a level of integrity and objectivity that allowed him to address problems in that church with a greater degree of authority.
I don’t believe that this arrangement should become the norm in our churches. Even though Paul and Barnabas modelled it, the other apostles regularly received support from their churches (1 Corinthians 9:4-5). However, the principle underlying “tent-maker” ministers deserves more recognition than it gets.
Darren Arndt,
Mississauga, Ont.
Article irrelevant
I found it ridiculous to print an article that pastors should not be paid (Aug. 2). Whether pastors should be paid is not an ongoing debate in most MB churches today. In all the churches I am familiar with in the Canadian MB Conference, there are issues far more serious and timely than this one. It would be difficult to find many MBs who agree that pastors should not be paid.
I think most members of MB churches would agree that pastoring is one of the hardest jobs that exist. Some may think I’m biased because my father is a pastor, but it is precisely because I come from a pastor’s family that I see how incredibly difficult the job is. It is not a 9-to-5 job, but a 24-hour position, a lifetime calling to be a constant leader of the church. It would be outrageous to think of not paying a doctor or lawyer. A pastor is a counsellor, leader, committee head, consultant and many other things to his or her entire congregation, and deserves to be paid for it.
George H. Epp suggests that if a pastor were to be taken off the payroll, “the folks would find ways to cover the bills.” I can’t begin to list the problems this would cause in a church. The money would not come equally from every member, but a few wealthier members would probably end up providing the bulk of the pastor’s pay. The pastor would no doubt feel indebted to these people, and they might try to sway him or her to their own point of view in church issues, knowing that he could not easily disagree with them. If they happened to own a tobacco farm or winery, how would the pastor feel about preaching against smoking or drinking?
This article also states that 700 new clergy are needed in the next decade. Churches should be focused on sending young people to Bible school and encouraging them to listen to God’s call so that these positions can be filled by the right people. An article like this is a discouragement to finding pastors and church workers. I am 22, have attended Bible school and am currently attending university. Reading an article like this does not encourage me to go into the ministry. I know that people in the ministry are never wealthy, that God’s call is what’s most important and that we have to trust Him to provide for our needs. But you won’t meet that quota of 700 new workers if the churches stop paying their staff. Look at all the want ads in the Herald. Aren’t we short staffed enough already?
Cara Pauls,
St. Catharines, Ont.
Zimbabwe ready to host
I have recently returned from Zimbabwe. Our brothers and sisters in the Brethren in Christ churches of Zimbabwe are working diligently preparing to host the next global assembly of Mennonite World Conference in August 2003. They realize the current negative image of Zimbabwe overseas and despair that people will not come to the assembly as a result.
Two main concerns seem to be causing people to not want to go to Zimbabwe: fear because of the actions and proclamations of the government against white Zimbabwean farmers; and a belief that going is supporting a corrupt, hateful government. I’d like to address both concerns.
The actions of the Zimbabwean government against the white farmers are not broadly supported by the general population. A substantial majority in the urban centres of Bulawayo and Harare are firmly in the opposition camp. Most Zimbabweans would agree, as do many white Zimbabwean farmers, that land redistribution is something that must be dealt with, but fairly, with compensation, without violence and without wholesale disruption of the economy. In any case, the farm seizures and any accompanying tensions are isolated to those few areas where white farms are concentrated. Bulawayo, the city that will host the global assembly, is as safe as most cities in North America or Europe.
When travelling I do not stay in hotels but rather in the homes of ordinary church members in urban and rural areas. I travel alone and take public transport in cities and across countries. In Bulawayo, my host Ronald Lizwe Moyo and I walked through township after township. We visited friends and complete strangers. We waded through crowded markets and waited in packed bus ranks. I travelled alone on public buses to Zambia and back to Harare at the height of the farm seizures. Not once did I encounter hostility as a result of my being white. To the contrary, many, ordinary black Zimbabweans approached me and welcomed me. At a meeting I attended with many Brethren in Christ leaders, they expressed their frustration and concern that people in Europe and North America were only hearing the words of their president instead of the words of ordinary Zimbabweans, who are overwhelmingly hospitable, gentle and gracious. At this point, there is absolutely no need for foreigners to fear travelling to Bulawayo.
It is understandable that some people feel foreigners should not attend the assembly because it would appear to show support for a vile government. Those who feel that way are adhering to ideals and principles that have our interests and feelings in mind, not those of our Zimbabwean brothers and sisters. Our brothers and sisters in the Brethren in Christ church are imploring us to come. Who are we to say we know better than they whether people from North America and Europe should attend? There are times to make symbolic gestures to stand in solidarity against corruption. That stand, in this case, would be seen by our Zimbabwean brothers and sisters as a stand against them.
Whether Europeans and North Americans will attend the assembly is a large issue in church circles in Zimbabwe. There is great concern and anxiety that the church in Africa will not be supported, that once again Africa will be the left-out continent. Those of us who do not go will miss out on an immeasurable experience. Statistics, whether relating to HIV–AIDS, famine or corruption, always point out the gloom of Africa. Statistics do not and cannot capture that remarkable spirit that is abundant in so much of Africa, a spirit that thrills the soul and makes Christianity vibrant and powerful even in dire circumstances.
Ronald Lizwe Moyo stated: “Shouldn’t our brothers and sisters around the world want to support us and stand beside us even if times are bad? In fact, isn’t that the time Christ would say they must stand beside us?”
Ray Dirks, Mennonite Heritage Centre Gallery,
Winnipeg, Man.
We need both sides
Ron Redekop’s “Open Letter to MCC” (June 21) reminded me of the great blessings I have discovered in becoming part of the Mennonite Brethren family, our long-standing doctrine that sees the totality of the Christian faith lived out in individual lives. Down through the ages dialogue has gone back and forth between the evangelical elements of the Christian faith and what might be termed more liberal views. On the traditional, evangelical side, there has been a strong emphasis on personal salvation and walking in obedience to the gospel. On the other, liberal side, we have heard the call for social justice, social responsibility, understanding, tolerance and intervention. It’s unfortunate but true that the evangelical side has been seen as intolerant of those who are less fortunate or even just different. On the other side, the liberal, social justice understanding has been seen as ignoring the call to repentance, personal responsibility and a relationship with God. It is unfortunate that these two views have been seen as diametrically opposed and in competition with one another.
While I know that the above is an oversimplification, it is worth noting that both sides have their strengths and weaknesses. They tend to emphasize one side, which becomes their strength, while almost totally ignoring the other view, which of course is their weakness. That is where we as Mennonite Brethren come in. It has been our tradition that the gospel is not a case of either/or. Rather the gospel is to be seen in its totality. It is a call for repentance and right relationship with God, and a striving to be used of God to make a difference in the social, political and economic condition of people around the world. The evangelical and the social justice sides are to be taken with equal seriousness. The gospel encompasses a personal salvation that is lived out in obedience to God and in harmony with other people and their needs. We have labelled this an “Anabaptist” worldview.
The danger we all face is the myopic viewpoint which sees only our own personal preferences, strengths and areas of emphasis. In their zealousness for social justice and reform, the argument can be made that MCC has placed less emphasis on the need for personal salvation, obedience to God’s Word and the call to repentance that each person needs to heed. The open letter from Northside Community Church is a call for a course correction back to more of a traditional Anabaptist viewpoint. In our call for justice and reform, we as Anabaptists must ring loud and clear the clarion call of God’s grace poured out to repentant sinners who find salvation in the blood of Jesus Christ! Jesus said, “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?”
As Anabaptists, we don’t see the dichotomy between the two viewpoints, but rather the undivided totality of Christ’s call to radical discipleship. We live between these two points of view, encompassing both and ignoring neither. If, as has been suggested in the open letter and as I believe is the case, MCC has strayed from these roots, then let us all issue a call for a return to the place where we live out our faith in the cause of repentance and reform. It is through the hand of caring that the message of salvation must be extended. This isn’t just Anabaptist theology; it’s the gospel.
Chris Douglas, Pastor,
Central Heights Church, Abbotsford, B.C.
Response buried
When you published the “Open Letter to MCC” (June 21), you gave it prominence, half a page, apart from the Letters section, with a border. MCC provided a serious response but you buried it on the fifth page of the Letters section (Aug. 2). Surely the MCC response deserved the same prominence as the original letter.
Gordon Stewart,
Killarney Park MB Church, Vancouver, B.C.
Not sufficient
I was glad to see that MCC wrote an official response (Aug. 2) to the “Open Letter to MCC” ( June 21) , but I was dismayed by the contents. It starts by stating the mission of MCC, which sounds biblical, but the following arguments for specific projects, and MCC’s attitudes, show evidence that they have indeed strayed from their mandate. Indeed, much of what anyone does has a “political dimension”, but the argument that MCC has no political intention is hardly plausible. The comment on the Palestinian refugees’ plight still being unresolved shows a political intention, rather than “sharing our experiences, resources and faith in Jesus Christ”. The B.C. referendum brochure defence suggested that those who voted in favour of it do not have “principled” agreement. The defence of the Women’s Concerns Report is not worth commenting on, so the Open Letter’s concerns were not addressed sufficiently.
Trudy Klassen,
Prince George, B.C.
Pieces missing
The latest article by Reuben Pauls (Aug. 2) leaves a host of questions unanswered. In the past, our pastors and leaders gave a clear statement on what our Conference believed in regard to the end times. Today our pastors do not address end times issues. Were our forefathers wrong in believing the whole Word of God, or does our enlightenment allow us to disregard some biblical truths?
There are other issues in Pauls’s article which deserve scrutiny:
- The Rapture, Tribulation and Millennium are not biblical categories. How is this justified in light of 1 Thessalonians 4; Revelation 7:13-14; Luke 21; Revelation 20?
- We avoid linking current events to carefully crafted timelines. Jesus admonished the leaders of His day, regarding their lack of understanding of current events (Matthew 16:1-4).
- Mennonite Brethren place priority on Jesus’ teaching not on Old Testament apocalyptic literature. Since when was only the New Testament God-given (2 Timothy 3:16)?
- The Bible gives no clear answer to this world’s end. 2 Peter 3:1-3 seems to spell out the end of the world in fairly simple terms.
- Article 18 does not adhere to dispensational teaching. There are three dispensations: Patriarchal, Mosaic (Jewish) and Christian. Article 18 does make reference to the present age, which I assume means this age of grace, the dispensation of Christians.
|
I agree that our salvation is not contingent on these issues but is based on our faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ. We are, however, admonished to study the Scriptures (Acts 17:11; 2 Timothy 2:15).
Peter Funk,
Abbotsford, B.C.
Sections missing
Re “What we believe” (Aug. 2): I know we will never have a Confession of Faith that is perfect because our language changes; so does our understanding of biblical teachings, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.
So do we need a Confession of Faith at all? Is the Bible not sufficient? If each church member would have the same perfect understanding of biblical teachings, we would not need a Confession. However, because our understanding is incomplete (1 Corinthians 13:9), a Confession gives the church guidelines for beliefs, teachings and conduct.
It is very difficult to make the right decisions about what to include and what to exclude, since not all can be included. Article 18 of our new Confession omits beliefs which were included in former Confessions. I refer, first, to Jesus’ return for the rapture of His church, which is imminent, and His visible return in power and glory (Matthew 24:30; Revelation 19:11-16), which is not imminent, since the great tribulation and the rule of the antichrist (Matthew 24:15-29; 2 Thessalonians 2:8) have to happen first. Second, I refer to the omission of the restoration of Israel as a nation in the promised land and the establishment of the messianic Kingdom on earth.
I know that our salvation does not depend on understanding these prophecies, but they are part of the Bible. (2 Timothy 3:16; 1 Peter 1:19). Reuben Pauls writes that it is refreshing that the “dispensational teaching” (which includes both the return of Christ for His church and the coming of the messianic Kingdom) “has not found its way into our MB Article 18.” I find this disturbing. For me, the different dispensations within God’s plan of salvation are quite evident in Scripture. They are a key for easier understanding of many Bible passages like “having the puzzle pieces up-side up”.
While I, too, reject the extremes and human fantasies in dispensational teaching, my concern lies in the results of ignoring sound, biblical doctrine. Examples include the devastation of the European world which resulted from the rejection of salvation by faith, as preached by reformers; and the disgrace that resulted from the resistance of Protestants and Catholics to the more biblical understanding of the church and baptism, as taught by the Anabaptists. The refusing of these doctrines was based on the perceived extremes of Thomas Muenzer, Jan van Leyden and others who were considered to be Anabaptists, and had little to do with whether these views were biblical. Could it be that we as the MB Conference are falling into the same error as others have when they rejected sound biblical doctrines? Could it be that by ignoring certain doctrines we could fall back to the very rudimentary understanding of biblical prophecy which theologians and churches had 500 years ago?
We have the serious warning in Revelation 22:18-19 “not to add and not to take away from the words of this book”. Does Revelation not speak clearly about the tribulation during the reign of the Antichrist and about the reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years (Revelation 20)? Should we not at least mention it in our Confession of Faith?
Peter Huebert,
Abbotsford, B.C.
See Bible through Jewish eyes
Jake Peters (Letters, Sept. 13) does not see the purification rituals in Leviticus and Numbers as a forerunner of baptism, nor that they always involved immersion. That is a reasonable conclusion when we study the Bible alone, because many things that were common cultural knowledge when the Bible was written were not included in the text.
Jews have long understood those passages to refer to total immersion. Their custom, still followed today, requires the candidate to be scrupulously clean before entering the mikvah, then to immerse him/herself completely three times in front of an eyewitness, flexing fingers and toes and fluttering eyelids to ensure complete contact with the water. This makes two things clear: total immersion is the goal, and it is not a physical washing but a ritual symbolic of spiritual purification.
For more about the mikvah, search the Internet for “mikvah” or “mikveh”. I am grateful to Messianic believers (Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah) for showing me how much we puzzle over, get wrong or miss altogether by not seeing the Bible through Jewish eyes.
Alan Chattaway,
Surrey, B.C.
Baptism event, not made important
I agree that the only biblically appropriate baptism occurs when a person voluntarily undergoes the procedure after having put his/her faith in Jesus Christ. The importance of the event is the event itself and not the particular mode being applied. Whether one is baptized by immersion, pouring or sprinkling is far less important than the fact that one is baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Would it not be edifying if we could all lay aside our personal and denominational biases, accept the different modes of baptism as being equally valid and get on with the work we are supposed to be doing (Matthew 28:19)? Or do we continue to rank the different modes thinking that God prefers one method over another? I am convinced that all who have put their faith in Jesus Christ are part of the body of Christ regardless of the mode of baptism they may have undergone.
Frank J. Thiessen,
Winnipeg, Man.
Grammar correction
The margin comment on p. 36 of the Sept. 13 issue says, “Three adjectives come to mind: enthusiasm, dynamism, optimism.” Actually, all three words are nouns, not adjectives.
Grammatically (adverb) yours,
William Schroeder,
Winnipeg, Man.
Previous | Next Last modified November 21, 2002.
© 2002 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.
|
